Explosions reported in Manchester?
Discussion
If the reports are true that the bomber and his family were involved in the armed struggle to overthrow the ex-Libyan leader Qaddafi then my first thought was did WE have anything to do with it? Was his father seen as an asset by the government, was he encouraged to recruit others?
I doubt we will ever know.
SD.
I doubt we will ever know.
SD.
durbster said:
Burwood said:
I see that prick Corbyn is trying to score points by saying our foreign policy is to blame.of course it's a factor but it was Labours policy too.
Not sure what your beef is. You're complaining that he said something you agree with. 
Burwood said:
p1stonhead said:
Burwood said:
I see that prick Corbyn is trying to score points by saying our foreign policy is to blame.of course it's a factor but it was Labours policy too.
It wasnt his policy though. Just because an old Labour leader thought it should what we do be doesnt mean he does.Its not the sole reason of course, but why the f
k cant we leave things alone sometimes.Stuff like this (whilst understandable while emotions are running high) helps doesnt it.....
'Here is another one of our bombs for you as revenge' - did it kill any of their kids? Who knows.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4542346/RA...
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/man...
Edited by p1stonhead on Friday 26th May 08:14
Burwood said:
durbster said:
Burwood said:
I see that prick Corbyn is trying to score points by saying our foreign policy is to blame.of course it's a factor but it was Labours policy too.
Not sure what your beef is. You're complaining that he said something you agree with. After Afghanistan and Libya, lessons have to be learnt. I'm not sure why we as a nation have chosen to position ourselves where we have in a global sense but it isn't practically sustainable.
Burwood said:
durbster said:
Burwood said:
I see that prick Corbyn is trying to score points by saying our foreign policy is to blame.of course it's a factor but it was Labours policy too.
Not sure what your beef is. You're complaining that he said something you agree with. This does seem representative of where we are with British politics. The current solutions clearly aren't working but when somebody offers an alternative option, we're too afraid to take it.
La Liga said:
ne must be a 'hand-wringer' to object to criminalising / punishing millions of law-abiding people who cause no issues to society.
Complex problems generally don't have simple solutions.
Out of interest Liga, what was your view on the handgun ban?Complex problems generally don't have simple solutions.
Because that was exactly "punishing
Cobnapint said:
V8 Fettler said:
MikeT66 said:
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: I can't work out if people are serious when they suggest banning any religion?
No - banning won't work and never has. What may work is removal of 'faith' schools, teaching of all religions in schools (I would prefer that children were taught about other viewpoints rather than just have to listen to indoctrinated parents) along with the importance of maintaining a liberal and questioing outlook, and removing religions from being afforded special protection in law. After all, if these 'gods' are so omnipotent, he/they/she shouldn't require man-made laws for protection surely...?While Roman Catholic, Sikh, Jewish and CoE schools would more than likely turn out well educated teenagers that could slip into modern British working life, 'baggage free' , all a pupil at a Muslim faith school is going to hear are highly islam biased teachings, way off the curriculum that they are supposed to be taught, with lots of prayers in between, and the inside of a flipping mosque later.
By allowing faith schools, we are shooting ourselves in the foot. We'll never get our future communities and rising population out of the Sunni/Shia cycle if influence.
If certain breeds of dog are deemed to be a danger / problem there was no call to ban all dogs.
V8 Fettler said:
The fact that some religionists kill innocent people in the name of religion demonstrates some of the mental health issues associated with religion.
If people continue to be a member of a proscribed organisation then the legislation shall apply; proscribed meaning forbidden.
It's a pragmatic, broadbrush solution that deals with religious indoctrination at the source, which obviously isn't occurring at the moment. It will clearly not be favoured by the hand-wringers, but there we are.
The fact that some people with political ideologies kill innocent people in the name of politics demonstrates some of the mental health issues associated with politics.If people continue to be a member of a proscribed organisation then the legislation shall apply; proscribed meaning forbidden.
It's a pragmatic, broadbrush solution that deals with religious indoctrination at the source, which obviously isn't occurring at the moment. It will clearly not be favoured by the hand-wringers, but there we are.
Therefore we should ban politics.
Islamic extremism is as much a political ideology as a religious belief. A Caliph is both a political and religious leader.
MikeT66 said:
Yes - the point I was trying to make. Having no religious education in schools could still lead to indoctrination away from the education system in churches/mosques, etc, as the knowledge and education of other viewpoints gets watered down. At least pre-arming youngsters with knowledge of other beliefs/social systems can hopefully lead to more acceptance of other viewpoints and hopefully more examination and questioning of the established religions and their ethics. Fundamental Muslim, Christian or Jew - your children will learn the basics of humanity, including upholding the rights of all people in our country - women and LGBT rights included. Don't like it? Tough.
I find it interesting that many of the more recent brain-dead losers that have committed terrorist acts are British-born but a few generations down from new immigrant status - leading a conclusion that their indoctrination has been learned whilst residing in the UK.
Fundamental Muslim - that is a new one, where do they fit in between half muslim, muslim, moderate muslim, extremist muslim ?I find it interesting that many of the more recent brain-dead losers that have committed terrorist acts are British-born but a few generations down from new immigrant status - leading a conclusion that their indoctrination has been learned whilst residing in the UK.
Which chapters do you need to follow to be deemed "Fundamental" ?
Burwood said:
durbster said:
Burwood said:
I see that prick Corbyn is trying to score points by saying our foreign policy is to blame.of course it's a factor but it was Labours policy too.
Not sure what your beef is. You're complaining that he said something you agree with. The irony.
durbster said:
But the leader of one of our major parties is offering that exact change, and you call him a prick for doing so.
This does seem representative of where we are with British politics. The current solutions clearly aren't working but when somebody offers an alternative option, we're too afraid to take it.
To be fair, he could have been referring to him as such due to other policies.This does seem representative of where we are with British politics. The current solutions clearly aren't working but when somebody offers an alternative option, we're too afraid to take it.
We finally have someone offering a different narrative on this, instead of the cross party mutual masturbation agreements.
If he pitches the fact that it only part of the issue and not seek to deflect blame from the extremists, it could be well received. The blairites within Labour are up in arms, so I would think it is likely they will be part of the campaign to discredit this idea.
del mar said:
MikeT66 said:
Yes - the point I was trying to make. Having no religious education in schools could still lead to indoctrination away from the education system in churches/mosques, etc, as the knowledge and education of other viewpoints gets watered down. At least pre-arming youngsters with knowledge of other beliefs/social systems can hopefully lead to more acceptance of other viewpoints and hopefully more examination and questioning of the established religions and their ethics. Fundamental Muslim, Christian or Jew - your children will learn the basics of humanity, including upholding the rights of all people in our country - women and LGBT rights included. Don't like it? Tough.
I find it interesting that many of the more recent brain-dead losers that have committed terrorist acts are British-born but a few generations down from new immigrant status - leading a conclusion that their indoctrination has been learned whilst residing in the UK.
Fundamental Muslim - that is a new one, where do they fit in between half muslim, muslim, moderate muslim, extremist muslim ?I find it interesting that many of the more recent brain-dead losers that have committed terrorist acts are British-born but a few generations down from new immigrant status - leading a conclusion that their indoctrination has been learned whilst residing in the UK.
Which chapters do you need to follow to be deemed "Fundamental" ?
Burwood said:
p1stonhead said:
Burwood said:
I see that prick Corbyn is trying to score points by saying our foreign policy is to blame.of course it's a factor but it was Labours policy too.
It wasnt his policy though. Just because an old Labour leader thought it should what we do be doesnt mean he does.Its not the sole reason of course, but why the f
k cant we leave things alone sometimes.Stuff like this (whilst understandable while emotions are running high) helps doesnt it.....
'Here is another one of our bombs for you as revenge' - did it kill any of their kids? Who knows.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4542346/RA...
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/man...
Edited by p1stonhead on Friday 26th May 08:14
Wasn't really the point; of course I understand why we do it.
There are just consequences which we can't pretend don't exist. Advertising our revenge bomb I think is a bit in poor taste despite obvious outrage at what happened. It wasn't anyone in the Middle East who did it, it was a British bloke so unless the bomb is going towards his house in Manchester all people who hate us will see is us bombing them again for technically something they didn't do (but granted may have inspired)
Edited by p1stonhead on Friday 26th May 09:28
e21Mark said:
del mar said:
MikeT66 said:
Yes - the point I was trying to make. Having no religious education in schools could still lead to indoctrination away from the education system in churches/mosques, etc, as the knowledge and education of other viewpoints gets watered down. At least pre-arming youngsters with knowledge of other beliefs/social systems can hopefully lead to more acceptance of other viewpoints and hopefully more examination and questioning of the established religions and their ethics. Fundamental Muslim, Christian or Jew - your children will learn the basics of humanity, including upholding the rights of all people in our country - women and LGBT rights included. Don't like it? Tough.
I find it interesting that many of the more recent brain-dead losers that have committed terrorist acts are British-born but a few generations down from new immigrant status - leading a conclusion that their indoctrination has been learned whilst residing in the UK.
Fundamental Muslim - that is a new one, where do they fit in between half muslim, muslim, moderate muslim, extremist muslim ?I find it interesting that many of the more recent brain-dead losers that have committed terrorist acts are British-born but a few generations down from new immigrant status - leading a conclusion that their indoctrination has been learned whilst residing in the UK.
Which chapters do you need to follow to be deemed "Fundamental" ?
p1stonhead said:
Burwood said:
p1stonhead said:
Burwood said:
I see that prick Corbyn is trying to score points by saying our foreign policy is to blame.of course it's a factor but it was Labours policy too.
It wasnt his policy though. Just because an old Labour leader thought it should what we do be doesnt mean he does.Its not the sole reason of course, but why the f
k cant we leave things alone sometimes.Stuff like this (whilst understandable while emotions are running high) helps doesnt it.....
'Here is another one of our bombs for you as revenge' - did it kill any of their kids? Who knows.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4542346/RA...
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/man...
Edited by p1stonhead on Friday 26th May 08:14
Wasn't really the point; of course I understand why we do it.
There are just consequences which we can't pretend don't exist. Advertising our revenge bomb I think is a bit in poor taste despite obvious outrage at what happened. It wasn't anyone in the Middle East who did it, it was a British bloke so unless the bomb is going towards his house in Manchester all people who hate us will see is us bombing them again for technically something they didn't do.
Edited by p1stonhead on Friday 26th May 09:27
ELUSIVEJIM said:
Funny how President Robert Mugabe has slaughtered his own people for decades but we do not go and bomb him. It seems we turn a blind eye when their is nothing in it for us.
Indeed.Have had the same thought for the past 30+ years.
Can remember having a discussion with the old man and one of my uncles on this very subject back in the mid 80's..!
Gaddafi was responsible for a bombing a disco where loads of US servicemen got killed, he was responsible for the bombing of a plane over Lockerbie, he bankrolled the IRA .
If we knew what would happen once Gaddafi was got rid of I dare say our approach would have been different, there seems to be a lot of people on here bullstting as if they knew what would happen once Gaddafi went and at a guess some of them probably weren't even born when Gaddafi was carrying out his terrorist acts.
If we knew what would happen once Gaddafi was got rid of I dare say our approach would have been different, there seems to be a lot of people on here bulls
tting as if they knew what would happen once Gaddafi went and at a guess some of them probably weren't even born when Gaddafi was carrying out his terrorist acts.Raygun said:
Gaddafi was responsible for a bombing a disco where loads of US servicemen got killed, he was responsible for the bombing of a plane over Lockerbie, he bankrolled the IRA .
If we knew what would happen once Gaddafi was got rid of I dare say our approach would have been different, there seems to be a lot of people on here bullstting as if they knew what would happen once Gaddafi went and at a guess some of them probably weren't even born when Gaddafi was carrying out his terrorist acts.
They would be the same people that would say we should do something about famine in certain countries, take in refugees, and do something when a dictator kills his own people including children.If we knew what would happen once Gaddafi was got rid of I dare say our approach would have been different, there seems to be a lot of people on here bulls
tting as if they knew what would happen once Gaddafi went and at a guess some of them probably weren't even born when Gaddafi was carrying out his terrorist acts.Not getting involved means not getting involved.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff